[Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch Armageddon

Jim Wiker papaipema at aol.com
Sun Feb 17 18:51:44 EST 2013


Dennis and Doug,
Both, nicely said, well written and all valid. Dennis, I completely agree. All things combined (it's like a pheasant flying past a dozen shotguns) sooner or later, you're gonna get it. They have little chance. And Doug, to answer one of you questions: these were established populations, especially Ottoe. I left out Sassacus because it was a fringe species, but it appears gone too. Arogos was an anomaly, but the rest were resident breeding populations that at times were huge.  
Dennis is right though, these things have as much to worry about from over management as they do development. And, once they're gone (especially skippers) you just can't put them back. Has anyone seen that work yet? They are not like a chalkboard, you can't erase them and think that they can just be relocated. At least in my experiences, when they are gone, they're gone.
Jim Wiker

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Schlicht <dws1108 at msn.com>
To: MexicoDoug <mexicodoug at aol.com>; Jim Wiker <papaipema at aol.com>; Andrew Williams <studiesnature at gmail.com>
Sent: Sun, Feb 17, 2013 4:51 pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch Armageddon



Thanks for you candid sympathy. 
I'm afraid Jim and I agree that the elephant in the closet is prescribed fire prairie management. These isolated preserves are partially and sometimes totally burned and burned often. If we were to bring it up on the list serve it will start another set of attacks. last year Shuey even wrote in the Lep News that after they (he and the TNC) burned the hell out of their Indiana prairies they now need to work on getting the species back. We call that prairie creationism, right Jim?
So we have isolated prairie obligate leps, surrounded by toxic corn, with huge changes in climate (moisture changes) and therefor vegetation changes.  The TNC and the DNRs are the enemy of biodiversity here.
Dennis
  
----- Original Message ----- 
  
From: MexicoDoug 
  
To: papaipema at aol.com ; dws1108 at msn.com   ; leps-l at mailman.yale.edu 
  
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 3:50   PM
  
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon
  


Thanks Jim, Thanks Dennis,

I'm saddened to hear   this.  I also think a reasonable interpretation 
could attribute this   to the farming practices, and if everything is 
sitting in the middle of   the corn varieties bred to have herbicide 
tolerance ... it doesn't take a   genius to have at least a little 
confidence as to the causal relationship   with the change in farming 
technique.

I don't have the same   sensitivity to this issue as you.  In my case it 
is simply an empty   feeling that accompanies the continued loss of 
biodiversity in some place   far away while I have my own set of 
ecological problems closer to the   heart.  So it is with the due respect 
of not living with it in my   backyard that I ask your indulgence to 
think about my   comments.

First, the good; I want to congratulate you both on   dedicating your 
time to insects that in the public perception are probably   
insignificant, drab little skippers which get about as much respect as   
moths in musty closet.  I personally find miniature skippers   
marvelously exquisite and certainly more intellectually challenging   
than Monarchs sans the migration phenomenon.  You are presenting   first 
hand data which when combined with other species statistics gives us   a 
more concrete measuring stick of ecological health by not picking some   
"pretty" generalized ecological indicator.  Far more useful for   
scientific analysis to describe the rate the ecosystem is   declining.

Next, the bad: As scientific, the hypothesis that it is Bt   corn (or 
whatever the hypothesis) needs to be tested rather than   conveniently 
assumed as I did in my first paragraph, I want to be sure   that I am 
properly interpreting the loss in its context. Are these species   at the 
fringe of their ranges and is there any other explanation we should   
rule out?  The edge of a USDA type zone which breathes   cyclically?  And 
was this land the robust natural habitat for these   skippers before the 
farmers came on to the scene ... or was their   appearance likely 
prompted by prior farming techniques which altered the   ecosystem and 
gave them the cornfield-niche in the first place?    There are more 
considerations I'm sure you've both though about, and it is   a very 
healthy discussion to go through them as the due diligence of   
presenting unbiased statements.

Finally, the ugly: I hope anyone   reading this knows that my question 
was not whether the test-tube bred   corn was detrimental to habitat.  It 
was whether the Bt-Corn pollen,   is killing the larvae as the Cornell 
study said it would and was used   indiscriminately under what would be 
pseudoscientific pretences to create   anarchy in the agricultural 
industry and all of its dependents 12-15 years   ago, and was still 
kicking and screaming 10 years ago.  If it didn't,   I'm relieved but 
need to re-evaluate the reputation of those who jumped on   this 
bandwagon and see whether they fudged their research techniques for   the 
purpose distorting truth and advancing an agenda.  Please don't   think 
I'm supporting the use of these agricultural techniques.  I   need 
Bt-corn in my zone as much as I want to live next to a garbage   dump.  
But a balanced approach is imperative where scientific   credibility is 
not abused by those who prey on the ignorance of the public   perception 
because they feel they have a superior moral calling.    There is no room 
in science for Popes.  In Sagan's words - there are   no "scientific 
authorities", just a method and to that I would add a   scholarly conduct 
which is as old as science itself, when it branched off   from philosophy 
and religion.

Epilogue: In a country where less   than 2% of the population is 
interested in doing commercial farming and   land is being gobbled up at 
IMO truly alarming rates due to unfettered   population growth which is 
transparently demonstrable (I'm an alarmist!   ;-) , it is not surprising 
to me that ecological niches are   decreasing.  I fail to see how a small 
group of elite and affluent   find terrorizing technology a moral calling 
rather than utilizing   systematic approaches to optimizing what we 
have...and going back to the   basics of the 1960's ZPG population growth 
models.  The current   national model of the USA is growth, growth, 
growth - for everything from   collecting taxes, to growing business and 
government, increasing   infrastructure, and just about everything else.  
I would expect to   lose niches along the way since these political 
pressures for growth   require that agriculture becomes more efficient as 
the industry is asked   to grow more food with less acreage and manpower. 
The fact that the   corn-belt is looking more like a factory is one 
visible manifestation of   this.  If the glass is half empty, I'd just 
say, let’s all move to   the Sierra foothills of California and Oregon, 
and then north to   Alaska.  But if it is half full, just involve the 
community and share   the beauty of nature in a positive manner to 
support a culture of   appreciation instead of finger pointing which will 
only turn people off   from scientists and the scientific method in 
general.  Provide   unbiased statistics and have people miss nature 
instead of run away from   the scientific alarmists, infidels and 
priests.  Since this thread   began a week ago, US population has 
increased by 60,000.  That is 1.2   million more acres (1,800 square 
miles) of habitat disruption: 500,000   acres in the US and 700,000 acres 
outsourced. The total area mentioned is   double the area of Champaign 
County, Illinois.  Crap.  Now, to   till my first vegetable garden and 
identify which politicians are ZPG   friendly....

Best
Doug

-----Original Message-----
From:   Jim Wiker <papaipema at aol.com>
To: dws1108   <dws1108 at msn.com>; leps-l <leps-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Sent:   Sat, Feb 16, 2013 10:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon

Doug,
Same thing A. arogos, H. ottoe, H. metea and H.   leonardus here in 
Illinois. Most where common to abundant (where they   occurred) into the 
mid 1990's. At that point they began a rather rapid   decline and now 
haven't been seen for a number of years. Ottoe in   particular, well into 
the 90's could be found by the hundreds in several   sites, I saw the 
last one in Illinois with Bob Pyle in 2008. It, nor the   others have 
been seen since.
Jim Wiker
Greenview,   IL


-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Schlicht   &lt;dws1108 at msn.com&gt;
To: MexicoDoug   &lt;mexicodoug at aol.com&gt;
Cc: leps-l   &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;
Sent: Sat, Feb 16, 2013 9:11   pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch   Armageddon

Doug,
They were doing Ok through the 80's and most of the   90's but then were 
wiped out by the late 2000's. Poweshiek numbers went   from around 100 on 
one site to none by 2010. These species were on   preserves, not farm 
land, but were surrounded by row crops. Gone or nearly   so are O. 
poweshiek, A. arogos, H. dacotae, H. ottoe and C. inornata. A   few 
others are not far behind.
Dennis Schlicht
Iowa Lepidoptera   Project
  ----- Original Message -----
  From:   MexicoDoug
  To: dws1108 at msn.com
  Cc: leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
    Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 11:54   AM
  Subject: Re:   [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch     Armageddon


Dennis,

It would be helpful to know whether   these   species' disappearances in
your area were doing well   before the Bt corn,   or already on the brink
of loss due to the   farming practices. Also,   whether this loss you've
documented is   due to the larva of the respective   species ingesting
amounts   toxic to them and dying due to it as was   proposed by   the
Cornell group. If it wasn't, I'd argue the unfortunate     situation was,
at best, not helped by a raging controversy which   IMO   served to 
divert
and divide attention from these   issues, and not present   work in
alternate peer reviewed   journals - which could be as simple as   
computer
models to   maintain a greater degree of biodiversity.

Could   a more   collaborative environment have come up with real   
solutions
and   perhaps a coordinated crop rotation scheme   which maintained some
useful   wild area interspersed   intelligently (where students at local 
ag
colleges   in a   supportive roll could participate in the design as part
of   their   curriculum)? Perhaps not. But it's not too late to find   
out
-   I hope.

I'm not trying to be a Monday morning   quarterback; and my post   was 
not
in support of Bt-corn. I'm   glad it's not in my backyard, and   how
boring it must be to try   to go Lepping in such an area. It's   seeing
the tactics used by   scientists we trust. My favorite   butterfly
observing grounds   was a unique mountain foothill habitat on   disturbed
ground   which had become overgrown and basically wild and teaming     with
over 100 species of butterflies, and at any given time at least   1/3
that amount. Now, the many hectares, without exception, are   parking
lots and malls and shopping areas in a series of new sprawled   out
commercial centers - and at the boundaries are residential areas   with
manicured lawns and the like. The development wiped out   everything
except the cockroaches and people and occasional vagrant that   ends up
plastered to a radiator grill.

I am sure we all are   sensitive to   the overpopulation problem. Every
year the US adds   3,000,000   people. In 1965 it was 194 million; 
today,
over   315 million.    It is difficult for me to fathom how much   
equivalent
habit is destroyed   for each person for their   activities (imagine
3,000,000 dumped   concentrated into your   state - that is approximately
the average amount by   state since   1965, btw) , "infrastructure
development", and of course the     food they require. For some reason 
no
one is having any success   in   controlling this and we are stuck with
these   consequences   everywhere. We could outsource farming,   by
importing more food from   Canada, etc., but then we'd only be   
exporting
the environmental drain with   it to other   places...

Very sorry to hear what you     reported,
Doug




-----Original   Message-----
From:   Dennis Schlicht   &lt;dws1108 at msn.com&gt;
To: leps-l   &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;;   MexicoDoug   
&lt;mexicodoug at aol.com&gt;
Sent: Sat, Feb   16, 2013   9:48 am
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch     Armageddon

Doug,
The article below says Bt corn was 19% of the   crop   then. It's 80-90%
now. While all of this Monarch concern   has been going   on, we have 
lost
5 prairie obligate   butterflies in the tall-grass prairie/   Bt corn
region (my data   in Iowa). Our prairies are surrounded by   corn.
Dennis   Schlicht
----- Original Message -----
   From:   MexicoDoug
To: monarch at saber.net ; leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
     Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 2:35 AM
Subject: Re:   [Leps-l]   [leps-talk] Monarch Armageddon


"Doug, it was   Lincoln   Brower who first set the precedent
for using the word     "Armageddon" in this article and others like      
it:"

Paul,

Huh ;-0 ??? I honestly didn't know   and   wouldn't expect he was the
source.

I wonder what   the   majority of unbiased scientists think of someone   
of
Lincoln   Brower's repute throwing out words such as   "Armageddon"   to
describe the evolving sciences in   agro-biotechnology. This   is really
an insult to science;   'Armageddon' has deeply   religious connotations
and is from the   New Testament Bible the   destruction of the Devil an
epic battle   when God comes down and   unleashes his fury. What   place
do
such religious    overtone-statements have in science   other than to
polarize/bias,   divert and offend researchers   and   constructive
discussion?

I just Googled, and sadly   it   seems you are right. I found this
article
in Mother   Jones   that Brower had written in 2001, which was a   result
of
the   GMO scandal that developed at that   time:

http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/85

It      gives me insight, to say the least.

It seems that Brower   for   some reason couldn't participate in the 
USDA
grant for   the   research into the GMO-larva topic program and   $200,000
grant   (which he considered a pittance). Another   diverse team   of
experts with some of the finest academic   credentials in this   country
was selected and a paper resulted   published in the most   prestigious
peer reviewed journal in the   United States - The   Proceedings of the
National Academy of   Sciences:

http://www.pnas.org/content/98/21/11937.abstract?sid=e059121b-ade8-4518-895c-2c10e4c5b113

Brower's      political statement printed in Mother Jones strikes me as    
 a
scathing, rambling condemnation and conspiracy theory   -   political
mobilization strategy. Is that an appropriate   place   to refute a
publication by trashing everyone in   government and   industry? Or
would
it be better to respond in   the same peer   review journal which   
accepts

contrary/disagreement submissions in a   specific   format for this 
purpose

called "Letters to the PNAS". I     couldn't find any retort. Maybe
you'll have better     luck:

http://www.pnas.org/cgi/collection/letters

In      the 1960's time frame Lincoln had the honor to be published   in
thwe
PNAS himself, at least 4 times. He is also an     excellent speaker.

Is the "Bt-corn killing monarch larvae"     in the field still
objectionable by ecologists anymore, on a     scientific basis? Now I
think
it finally hit me why the     monarch topic is avoided by some     list
members.

Best
Doug

-----Original     Message-----
From: Paul Cherubini     &lt;monarch at saber.net&gt;
To: Leps List      &lt;leps-l at mailman.yale.edu&gt;
Sent: Fri, Feb 15, 2013     4:46 pm
Subject: Re: [Leps-l] [leps-talk] Monarch      Armageddon

On Feb 15, 2013, at 1:00 PM, MexicoDoug      wrote:

&gt; I added the search term "Armageddon" for      fun.

Doug, it was Lincoln Brower who first set the     precedent
for using the word "Armageddon" in this article and     others like it:
http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/july2011/GMcropsmonarchbutterflieshabitat.php

In      the article Lincoln said this about Roundup herbicide use
in   the GMO   crops of the upper Midwest:

“It kills everything.   It’s   biodiversity Armageddon,"

And Lincoln and Chip   Taylor   collaborated on a paper
and wrote: "We conclude that,   because   of the extensive
use of glyphosate herbicide on crops   that are   genetically
modified to resist the herbicide,   milkweeds will   disappear
almost completely from   croplands."

But the    critically important information they   don't mention
in their paper is   that the field margins of these   Roundup
treated GMO crops are   teaming with bumblebees,   honeybees,
monarchs and butterflies   like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZCOJnJU1UE

So      those GMO croplands are not hardly a legitimate
example of      "Biodiversity Armageddon"

Paul Cherubini
El Dorado,        Calif.

_______________________________________________
Leps-l      mailing list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l



_______________________________________________
Leps-l      mailing list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l




    _______________________________________________Leps-l mailing 
listLeps-l at mailman.yale.eduhttp://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-
l
 _______________________________________________
Leps-l   mailing list
Leps-l at mailman.yale.edu
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/leps-l





 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/leps-l/attachments/20130217/2dbacd9e/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Leps-l mailing list